Category: 2020 election

A Gasp in Shock and a Sigh of Relief – Good Riddance to 45

A Gasp in Shock and a Sigh of Relief – Good Riddance to 45

Finally, after nearly four long years of having the most unqualified, self interested, crooked, divisive, and unpatriotic individual in office; we are just a few months from being rid of Donald J. Trump.

In an election that was shockingly close, Trump and his allies are crying foul. He and his base would have you believe that the Democrats rigged an election where the master plan included barely win an election, keeping Mitch McConnell in office, and have a runoff election in Georgia to determine the Senate majority.

Meanwhile, Trump, his base, and the GOP did everything they could to undermine our constitutional right to elect our representatives and leaders. For example:

Over the course of his presidency Trump has several times alluded to remaining in office indefinitely. For example:

On top of that Donald Trump has not once committed to a peaceful transition of power.

This want-to-be dictator has undermined our election process from day one of his term. Now he is falsely claiming victory in an election that he lost.

He has created a cult-like following, with supporters praying outside election office doors for a victory. (Source) He has followers that use intimidation and threats of violence against opponents such as a police captain writing on social media about Biden supporters to “put a bullet in their skull” (Source) or his supporters in Philadelphia making death threats to the Republican official responsible for vote counting (Source). His pundits like Steve Bannon call for violence such as when Bannon said that Anthony Fauci and Christopher Wray should be beheaded (Source). And, Alex Jones trying to instigate a riot outside an election office in Arizona (Source). Meanwhile there are Trump supporters shouting “Stop the count” in Detroit and “Count the votes” in Phoenix. (Source)

In closing, it’s shocking that the election was so close despite the countless follies of the 45th president. Now, however; hopefully this nation in turmoil can finally breath a sigh of relief.

Related blog posts:

How can people still support this president?

How are people not outraged at this president? How are there still people that support him despite the overwhelming and ongoing display of ineptitude from him and his administration on the handling of this pandemic?

At the time of this writing, April 19, 2020, there are 763,597 confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the United States. As well, there are a reported 40,566 deaths and 70,123 recoveries at this time. The United States has more confirmed cases than any country in the world right now. Currently, the country with the next highest number of cases is Spain with 198,674.

It didn’t have to be this way. There were contingency plans for this very situation. However, because of the hubris of this president, the whole country is suffering. According to an article from Business Insider Trump ignored multiple warnings about the threat of a pandemic. The article reports that officials from the Obama administration briefed Trump on how to respond to a pandemic, just days before Trump’s inauguration. Then, in 2019, the Department of Health and Human Services conducted a training exercise that was remarkably close to what is currently going on. And, as early as January 2020, US intelligence officials warned Trump of a pandemic. By the end of January through the beginning of February warnings of the pandemic were included in Trump’s daily briefings. However, if you believe Trump no one could have known how bad things could be.

Trump has not missed the opportunity to use this global crisis to further erode our democratic republic. He has continued his rhetoric that he has “total authority” as president. On April 14, 2020 Trump claimed that he had “total authority” over states decisions on opening up and relaxing their social distancing guidelines. Surprisingly, Bret Baier from Fox News pointed out the hypocrisy from conservatives stating that “conservatives’ heads would have exploded if Obama had claimed total authority.” During that same program: “Fox News’ chief political anchor replied. “Constitutional scholars will say that this is not the president flicking on the switch, it’s the governors and the local authorities that have that going forward.” [Daily Beast]

On April 15, 2020 Trump has threatened to adjourn the US Congress over his appointees of federal judges and other political offices. [Reuters]

It is absolutely mind boggling how people still support this president and will still vote for him in November. This president wants absolute power with none of the responsibility. You can even watch him say that he takes no responsibility. Even his propaganda machine, Fox News, changed their stance on coronavirus. From the beginning Trump has been gaslighting this country, claiming they have it under control, that it would go away in April, that it was another hoax by the democrats, and on and on.

Ever Moving Lines

Ever Moving Lines

First and foremost, the opinions expressed herein are my own. Each individual has the right to think and believe as he or she so chooses. Equally, I believe it to be imperative that differing view points be expressed for the betterment of society. It took a group of individuals, many years ago, who had the point of view that a democratic republic was a better option than a monarchy. If not for that differing viewpoint of those individuals, we would not have privilege of being able to openly express our own opinions today. My only request for those who wish to give a rebuttal is that it be well researched, well thought out, and provide sources, with credible evidence, from more than one or two places.

  • We, as a free nation, claim that our soldiers fight and die for the continuation of our freedom. At what point do we lose the right to  make that claim when the leader of this free nation openly invites foreign governments to take part in some form or fashion in our elections? How is openly inviting a foreign government to play a role in influencing the outcome for the election of the officials meant to represent us, the citizens of this country, a means to uphold the continuation of our freedom?
  • If one makes the argument that any politician would take assistance from a foreign government or entity, so it doesn’t matter or it is just discounted as a standard practice, so to say.
    • This argument is plausible. However, I would ask for sources to back up this claim. Provide any sort of credible evidence that another (specific) politician has taken part in this kind of action. I do not claim that no other politician has not participated in such actions. If anyone is able to provide credible evidence of any other politician being involved in similar matters, please do provide sources for this information. I am strictly saying that we have many instances of credible evidence that this president is guilty of soliciting a foreign government for aid in personal political gain.
      • Trump says “I think I’d take foreign help for 2020 (MSNBC)
      • Trump rushes into damage control after saying he’d accept foreign help in 2020 (Politico)
      • Trump publicly asks China to investigate Biden (NBC)
      • Trump and White House claim there was no quid pro quo in regards to withholding military aid to Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine to investigate Biden (New York Times)
      • Mulvaney admits quid pro quo (Bloomberg)
      • Diplomat says he was told U.S. aid for Ukraine tied to request for probes: Washington Post (Reuters)
      • Judge Napolitano Schools ‘Fox & Friends’ on Impeachment: Schiff Just ‘Following the Rules’ Written by GOP (Daily Beast)
      • Impeachment reversal: Diplomat now acknowledges quid pro quo (AP)
    • Even if credible evidence were to be provided of another politician requesting assistance or taking assistance from a foreign government; it does not excuse the action. It is still wrong. Regardless if the politician is Republican or Democrat, a politician who utilizes foreign assistance must be held accountable for their actions.
  • Claim: government officials use quid pro quo all the time in negotiations with foreign governments. There is nothing wrong with it.
    • That statement is correct. However, there is a key difference in using such strategies for the benefit of our nation vs. using the strategy for the sole benefit of political gain. The latter is both illegal and unethical.
    • If one is ok with the current president taking such actions, would the same individual be ok with a future president utilizing the same strategy?
  • There is an Emoluments clause in the Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 8 and Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 7)
    • For those who view themselves as individuals who believe that the Constitution must be upheld; what is a reasonable justification for excusing a politician who clearly has no regard for the laws set forth in the Constitution?
      • The current president, while being recorded on video, made the statement that the Emoluments clause is “phony.” (Business Insider, 10/21/2019) 
    • There are multiple instances of the president using his office for personal gain.
      • Vice President stayed at a Trump hotel in Ireland, which was 180 miles away from from his meetings (Vox, 9/3/19)
      • From Mar-A-Lago to Trump Hotels, Reporter Says Trump Profits as President (NPR, 9/5/19)
      •  President Trump promotes his son, Donald Trump Jr’s, book on Twitter while simultaneously accusing Biden of self dealing (AP)
      • October 26, 2019: Company linked to Trump’s brother awarded $33 million government contract (Washington Examiner 10/26/19)
      • Article I: generally prohibits federal officeholders from receiving any gift, payment, or other thing of value from a foreign state or its rulers, officers, or representatives. (Encyclopedia Britannica)
      • Article II: generally prohibits federal officeholders from receiving any gift, payment, or other thing of value from a foreign state or its rulers, officers, or representatives. (Encyclopedia Britannica)
  • Claim: this president has bolstered our economy. That the economy has never been this good.
    • Yes, the economy is currently doing well. With that being said, I pose the following questions to you, the reader:
      • Are you personally better off financially now than you have ever been? Are you paying less taxes than you have ever paid? Has it been easier now than ever to find gainful employment?
    • However, contrary to the claims of this administration, this economy is not the best it has ever been due solely to the current president. The economy has been growing steadily since 2008. Sources for my claim:

Don’t Let 2020 Only Be Hindsight

Don’t Let 2020 Only Be Hindsight

Ever since the last presidential election in November 2016, it seems there isn’t much of a middle ground regarding how Americans or even the world feels about the subsequent years. Given all that has been reported through the years, there still seems to be no shortage on moments that give one pause to consider what lies ahead.

On Wednesday May 1, 2019 Attorney General, William Barr, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee. When answering a question from Senator Dianne Feinstein regarding how the President’s instruction to former White House Counsel, Don McGahn, to end the Mueller probe was not obstruction of justice; Barr stated the following:

If the president is being falsely accused, which the evidence now suggests that the accusations against him were false, and he knew they were false, and he felt that this investigation was unfair, propelled by his political opponents and was hampering his ability to govern, that is not a corrupt motive for replacing an independent counsel. (Slate)

That is to say, that if any President merely feels that an investigation is unfair, false, or initiated by political opponents; the President can order the removal of an independent counsel. Meaning the President can stop any investigation into the possibility of wrongdoing by the President. Or, another way of looking at it, the office of the President is above the law.

That means that if Nixon had so desired, he could have cancelled the investigation that led to his eventual resignation and there would have been zero consequences. It means that if Bill Clinton felt the investigation that led to his impeachment was unfair, he could have cancelled it with no repercussions. It also means that should any future President find him or herself in legal jeopardy, that President can just order the investigation to be stopped. That ideology is the opposite of a system of checks and balances. That ideology is the groundwork to the end of a nation of laws and the beginning of a nation of tyranny.

During that same testimony, when Senator Christopher Coons asked Barr if a future campaign was offered dirt on a rival from a foreign adversarial power, North Korea in this example, should the campaign report to the FBI. After a pause, Barr finally answered yes.

For those who stand on the side of the President and claim that the investigation was a waste of time, a witch hunt, an attempt at coup, or some nefarious plan by any other name; please consider the following:

Over the course of two years the Special Counsel has indicted, convicted or gotten guilty pleas from 34 people and three companies as it related to interference from the Russians in the 2016 election. (TIME) If you are up for some reading, you can read a searchable version of the Mueller report: Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index Volume 2 which starts on page 200 begins the report on the Obstruction Inquiry.

Where we go from here may be one of the most pivotal points in our Nation’s most recent history. If all of these actions are waved off without consequence, then we are essentially saying that laws don’t matter. A system of checks and balances doesn’t matter. A government by the people and for the people doesn’t matter. If a person who is on the side of Trump and the Republicans who are protecting him are ok with Trump proceeding as he has, then the same person should have zero problem if some day a democrat President follows the same precedent.

Consider these “What If” scenarios.

  • During the 2020 election a democratic candidate makes the statement “China, if you are watching, maybe you can help produce Trump’s tax records.” (Example)
  • A democrat is elected President then shuts down the government if funds are not provided to combat climate change (Example)
  • A democrat President meets with an adversarial leader with only the adversarial leader’s translator present (Example) or the President orders the concealment of any records with a foreign leader (Example)
  • A democratic President refuses to condemn or speak out against terrorist attacks conducted by any non-white hate group (Example)
  • A democratic President mocks a war hero (Example)
  • A democratic President using social media to attack, threaten, belittle, spread false information on anyone that oppose him/her. (Example)
  • A democratic President chooses to believe foreign adversarial leaders or his/her own gut instinct rather than that of Intelligence Community (Example)
  • A democratic President made remarks about “President for life.” (Example) (Example) (Example)
    • Many times in the past there those who said that Clinton would not give up the presidency, that Bush would not give up the presidency, or that Obama wouldn’t give it up. This, however, is the first time a president has made a comment about not giving up the presidency.

Right now we have a White House that claims to be the most transparent administration in the history of the United States. This despite the administration vowing to fight, ignore, and block all subpoenas from Congress concerning any of the multitude of investigations (Wired) into Trump and his administration. (New York Times)

Perhaps we should heed the words of one of the 2016 presidential candidates:

Having a sitting president under criminal investigation would result in a ‘constitutional crisis.’She’s likely to be under investigation for criminality for a very, very long time to come. We’re going to be tied up in court for the rest of our lives with this deal…If Hillary is elected, she will be under protracted criminal investigation likely followed by the trial of a sitting president. This is just what we need. (TIME)